Advertisement

Identification of integrated geometric errors of rotary axis and setup position errors for 5-axis machine tools based on machining test

  • Nuodi Huang
  • Yongqiao Jin
  • Xiaoyong Li
  • Liang Liang
  • Shijing WuEmail author
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
  • 24 Downloads

Abstract

As a fundamental error source, geometric errors of 5-axis machine tools have a negative influence on a machine tool’s motion accuracy. Large numbers of efficient and robust geometric error measurement and compensation methods have been developed by existing researches to improve the performance of the machine tools during the automatic machining of the workpiece. However, influence of the geometric errors on workpiece clamping is hard to measure and evaluate in most of the clamping processes since manual operations are involved. It is important to identify both geometric errors and setup position errors to control the entire machining process, standing from the perspective of a manufacturer. In this study, a position-dependent geometric error and setup position error identification method is investigated based on machining test. A kinematic model for a 5-axis machine tool with tilting rotary table is constructed while considering both geometric errors of the two rotary axes and setup position errors. Machining patterns and calculation algorithm are designed to analytically calibrate these errors. Experimental demonstration is conducted to validate the feasibility of the proposed measurement method.

Keywords

Geometric error Setup position error Kinematic model Error identification Machining test 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

Funding information

The authors received financial support from the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 51705374, 51705372), the China Postdoctoral Science Foundation (No. 2017M622509), and the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities.

References

  1. 1.
    Ibaraki S, Sawada M, Matsubara A, Matsushita T (2010) Machining tests to identify kinematic errors on five-axis machine tools. Precis Eng 34(3):387–398CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Huang N, Bi Q, Wang Y (2015) Identification of two different geometric error definitions for the rotary axis of the 5-axis machine tools. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 91:109–114CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ding S, Huang X, Yu C, Liu X (2016) Identification of different geometric error models and definitions for the rotary axis of five-axis machine tools. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 100(1–6):1–6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Wu C, Fan J, Wang Q, Pan R, Tang Y, Li Z (2018) Prediction and compensation of geometric error for translational axes in multi-axis machine tools. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 95(9–12):3413–3435CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Li J, Xie F, Liu XJ, Li W, Zhu S (2016) Geometric error identification and compensation of linear axes based on a novel 13-line method. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 87(5–8):2269–2283CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Yang J, Ding H (2016) A new position independent geometric errors identification model of five-axis serial machine tools based on differential motion matrices. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 104:68–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Xiang S, Yang J (2014) Using a double ball bar to measure 10 position-dependent geometric errors for rotary axes on five-axis machine tools. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 75(1–4):559–572CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Xia H, Peng W, Ouyang X, Wang SJ, Chen X (2017) Identification of geometric errors of rotary axis on multi-axis machine tool based on kinematic analysis method using double ball bar. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 122:161–175CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Zhong L, Bi Q, Huang N, Wang Y (2018) Dynamic accuracy evaluation for five-axis machine tools using S trajectory deviation based on R-test measurement. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 125:20–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Li J, Xie F, Liu XJ, Dong Z, Song Z, Li W (2017) A geometric error identification method for the swiveling axes of five-axis machine tools by static R-test. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 89(9–12):3393–3405CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Xiang S, Li H, Deng M, Yang J (2018) Geometric error identification and compensation for non-orthogonal five-axis machine tools. Int J Adv Manuf Technol:1–15Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Jiang Z, Bao S, Zhou X, Tang X, Zheng S (2015) Identification of location errors by a touch-trigger probe on five-axis machine tools with a tilting head. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 81(1–4):149–158CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Huang N, Zhang S, Bi Q, Wang Y (2016) Identification of geometric errors of rotary axes on 5-axis machine tools by on-machine measurement. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 84(1–4):505–512CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ibaraki S, Kudo T, Yano T, Takatsuji T, Osawa S, Sato O (2015) Estimation of three-dimensional volumetric errors of machining centers by a tracking interferometer. Precis Eng 39:179–186CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Andolfatto L, Lavernhe S, Mayer JRR (2011) Evaluation of servo, geometric and dynamic error sources on five-axis high-speed machine tool. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 51(10–11):787–796CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
  17. 17.
    Okuma 5-axis Auto Tuning System website, https://www.okuma.co.jp/english/onlyone/fivetuning/index.html
  18. 18.
  19. 19.
    NAS 979: uniform cutting test, NAS series, metal cutting equipment specifications. 1969:34–7Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    ISO/DIS 10791-7:2014, Test Conditions for Machining Centres -- Part 7: Accuracy of a Finished Test PieceGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Uddin MS, Ibaraki S, Matsubara A, Matsushita T (2009) Prediction and compensation of machining geometric errors of five-axis machining centers with kinematic errors. Precis Eng 33(2):194–201CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Pezeshki M, Arezoo B (2016) Kinematic errors identification of three-axis machine tools based on machined work pieces. Precis Eng 43:493–504CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Jiang Z, Song B, Zhou X, Tang X, Zheng S (2015) On-machine measurement of location errors on five-axis machine tools by machining tests and a laser displacement sensor. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 95:1–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Hong C, Ibaraki S, Matsubara A (2011) Influence of position-dependent geometric errors of rotary axes on a machining test of cone frustum by five-axis machine tools. Precis Eng 35(1):1–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Jiang Z, Tang X, Zhou X, Zheng S (2015) Machining tests for identification of location errors on five-axis machine tools with a tilting head. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 79(1–4):245–254CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Alessandro V, Gianni C, Antonio S (2015) Axis geometrical errors analysis through a performance test to evaluate kinematic error in a five axis tilting-rotary table machine tool. Precis Eng 39:224–233CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Ding S, Huang X, Yu C, Liu X (2016) Novel method for position-independent geometric error compensation of five-axis orthogonal machine tool based on error motion. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 83(5–8):1069–1078CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Ltd., part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nuodi Huang
    • 1
  • Yongqiao Jin
    • 2
  • Xiaoyong Li
    • 1
  • Liang Liang
    • 1
  • Shijing Wu
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Hubei Key Laboratory of Waterjet Theory and New Technology, School of Power and Mechanical EngineeringWuhan UniversityWuhanChina
  2. 2.Shanghai Spaceflight Precision Machinery InstituteShanghaiChina

Personalised recommendations